<div dir="ltr">Hi Ronald<div>Maybe your number is correct, whether it is 6.3M or 7M,This is a shocking number for everyone especially in 201x such a large block allocated. This is not in 199x year.<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:25 AM Ronald F. Guilmette <<a href="mailto:rfg@tristatelogic.com">rfg@tristatelogic.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">In message <<a href="mailto:CALm9Cbn%2BR9oen9%2B9YBjfbK5gGTcmEmZ1yhxgDfw04OTC3MxeZg@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">CALm9Cbn+R9oen9+9YBjfbK5gGTcmEmZ1yhxgDfw04OTC3MxeZg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Meriem Dayday <<a href="mailto:meriemdayday@gmail.com" target="_blank">meriemdayday@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>This is a direct violation of the CoC.<br>
<br>
No, actually, it isn't.<br>
<br>
The information about how Cloud Innovation is presently making use of<br>
it's assigned 6,291,456 AFRINIC-administered IPv4 addresses is effectively<br>
public information, and it is not difficult to derive from any number of<br>
public sources (e.g. RIPEStat, <a href="http://bgp.he.net" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">bgp.he.net</a>, etc.)<br>
<br>
If you lived in the time of Galileo Galilei, would you consider it an<br>
affront to public decency if some people elected to look through the<br>
telescope and then just describe what they saw? And if so, then what<br>
is next? Book burning?<br>
<br>
>Disclosing such information and data without the company's consent is a<br>
>clear attempt of defamation and can have legal consequences on the<br>
>concerned person.<br>
<br>
OK, let's parse that statement, because it conjoins two different obvious<br>
logical problems.<br>
<br>
First, the Internet is *not* a private network. Fact's about what various<br>
companies are doing on the Internet are possible to see, and to learn,<br>
without needing the consent of the companies inolved. That is the nature<br>
of the Internet. If you want to run your own closed private intranet,<br>
then go head. Nobody will stop you and you can then keep every last<br>
detail of your corporate operations utterly secret. But the minute any<br>
company obtains Internet number resources and starts using those, it<br>
*voluntarily* gives up some of its corporate secrecy in exchange for being<br>
a part of, and a participant on this great communications experiment we <br>
call the Internet.<br>
<br>
I personally am not now, and never have been a customer of Cloud Innovation.<br>
And yet even well before today I already determined for myself that well<br>
more that 90% of Cloud Innovation's assigned AFRINIC-administered IPv4<br>
address space was being deployed to other continents. This is not a state<br>
secret by any means, and the information may be derived from 100% public<br>
sources. Anyone clever enough to seek it out will find the same information.<br>
<br>
Whether the manner in which Cloud Innovation is using/deploying its<br>
assigned number resources does or does not comport with its specific<br>
RSA and/or with community approved regulations is a separate question,<br>
and one which I myself do not have an answer to. In any case, the<br>
courts will sort out those questions in due course, I imagine. But the<br>
mere facts of how Cloud Innovation has deployed its AFRINIC-assigned<br>
resources, or how it would appear to make money, based on the available<br>
public evidence, are *not* corporate secrets. Any attempt to portray<br>
them as such is just an attempt at heavy-handed censorship.<br>
<br>
The second logical problem with the statement above is contained in the<br>
part that says "... attempt of defamation and can have legal consequences<br>
on the concerned person."<br>
<br>
Exactly so! If the guy who posted the material you are reacting to was<br>
willing to take the legal risk to post that material, IN SPITE OF the<br>
possibility that he could, at least in theory, be sued for defamation,<br>
then why are YOU worried about it? Why should AFRINIC be worried about<br>
it? Obviously, this (theoretical) possibility of a defemation lawsuit<br>
is only a problem for the guy who posted the (allegedly) defamatory<br>
text, and he obviiously was willing to take the risk in order to express<br>
his opinion, SO WHAT IS THAT TO YOU?<br>
<br>
Here again, shouting down in the original poster in this manner appears<br>
to me to be just another a heavy-handed attempt at pointless censorship.<br>
<br>
I hope that we here can all have open and frank discusions of all of the<br>
issues now of concern to AFRINIC without these kinds of attempts to<br>
muzzle dissenting viewpoints based on perfectly silly arguments.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
rfg<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Community-Discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net" target="_blank">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div>